Posted by burnsy483 on 12/6/2012 1:55:00 PM (view original):I'd also love if you could answer this question:

It's interesting that knowing how many games someone won is "COMPLETELY WORTHLESS" when there are stats about a pitcher that are "worth less" than wins. What does that make IP as a statistic?

If you want me to answer question, making 6 posts in a row after asking it isn't the best way to do that.

I asked the question, and then you posted something 6 minutes later. So I don't understand you, which doesn't surprise me.

You also still haven't answered the question.

OK, isolating individual stats is a poor way to make my point.

I'll try it this way, given all the tools we have to evaluate pitchers, W/L record is the least useful and should be ignored. It doesn't help you understand better how well a guy pitched, it doesn't give you details on leveraged situations (game management). It's fluky and outdated. It doesn't give you anything that you don't already get better from somewhere else. It's using a mile marker to estimate millimeters.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/6/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):Any statistic in a vacuum tells you nothing.

Example 1: a guy has a WHIP of 1.00. Is he a good pitcher?

Example 2: a guy has an ERA of 2.50. Is he a good pitcher?

I agree with that.

But I stand by my point that W/L record adds nothing. Pedro Martinez was 219-100 over his career. He was a great pitcher. Is he less great if he went 185-105, while all his other stats stayexactly* the same? Is he suddenly better if his record shifts to 235-93 and all his other stats stay exactly the same?

Obviously something has changed between 219-100, 185-105 and 235-93. Since you're ruling out his performance (which is exaclty the same), then it's the offense and game situations behind him while he's pitching.

Different context, different results. Maybe the 185-105 record was due to him giving up key hits in close (or tie) games, whereas the 219-100 or 235-93 Pedro in a parellel universe was giving up those same hits to the same batters in the same inning with large leads.

That's just speculation. Without the context, it's impossible to know the answer. Just as it would be foolish to say "he's exactly the same pitcher" because all the numbers on your spreadsheet add up the same way.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/6/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):Any statistic in a vacuum tells you nothing.

Example 1: a guy has a WHIP of 1.00. Is he a good pitcher?

Example 2: a guy has an ERA of 2.50. Is he a good pitcher?

I agree with that.

But I stand by my point that W/L record adds nothing. Pedro Martinez was 219-100 over his career. He was a great pitcher. Is he less great if he went 185-105, while all his other stats stayexactly* the same? Is he suddenly better if his record shifts to 235-93 and all his other stats stay exactly the same?

Obviously something has changed between 219-100, 185-105 and 235-93. Since you're ruling out his performance (which is exaclty the same), then it's the offense and game situations behind him while he's pitching.

Different context, different results. Maybe the 185-105 record was due to him giving up key hits in close (or tie) games, whereas the 219-100 or 235-93 Pedro in a parellel universe was giving up those same hits to the same batters in the same inning with large leads.

That's just speculation. Without the context, it's impossible to know the answer. Just as it would be foolish to say "he's exactly the same pitcher" because all the numbers on your spreadsheet add up the same way.

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/6/2012 1:55:00 PM (view original):I'd also love if you could answer this question:

It's interesting that knowing how many games someone won is "COMPLETELY WORTHLESS" when there are stats about a pitcher that are "worth less" than wins. What does that make IP as a statistic?

If you want me to answer question, making 6 posts in a row after asking it isn't the best way to do that.

I asked the question, and then you posted something 6 minutes later. So I don't understand you, which doesn't surprise me.

You also still haven't answered the question.

OK, isolating individual stats is a poor way to make my point.

I'll try it this way, given all the tools we have to evaluate pitchers, W/L record is the least useful and should be ignored. It doesn't help you understand better how well a guy pitched, it doesn't give you details on leveraged situations (game management). It's fluky and outdated. It doesn't give you anything that you don't already get better from somewhere else. It's using a mile marker to estimate millimeters.

The original question was:

How important are wins and losses for evaluating pitchers?

I answered somewhat. You called me “retarded” and “brain dead.”

I’m using your mile marker example here. If I asked you to how long it would take me to get from Yankee Stadium to Fenway Park, and from Yankee Stadium to Citizens Bank Park and you told me “they’re about the same” I would call this information meaningless. If you told me “Fenway is probably about 200 miles away, and CBP is probably 100 miles” I would consider this information useful. Even more than “somewhat.” Sometimes I don’t need to know millimeters. A mile marker often works pretty well. The ERA, the K/9, the FIP, etc, would tell me more information. Call the ERA the time it would take to get there in most instances. The K/9 is the amount of traffic I'll likely see, etc, etc. The more information, the better.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/6/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):Any statistic in a vacuum tells you nothing.

Example 1: a guy has a WHIP of 1.00. Is he a good pitcher?

Example 2: a guy has an ERA of 2.50. Is he a good pitcher?

I agree with that.

But I stand by my point that W/L record adds nothing. Pedro Martinez was 219-100 over his career. He was a great pitcher. Is he less great if he went 185-105, while all his other stats stayexactly* the same? Is he suddenly better if his record shifts to 235-93 and all his other stats stay exactly the same?

Obviously something has changed between 219-100, 185-105 and 235-93. Since you're ruling out his performance (which is exaclty the same), then it's the offense and game situations behind him while he's pitching.

Different context, different results. Maybe the 185-105 record was due to him giving up key hits in close (or tie) games, whereas the 219-100 or 235-93 Pedro in a parellel universe was giving up those same hits to the same batters in the same inning with large leads.

That's just speculation. Without the context, it's impossible to know the answer. Just as it would be foolish to say "he's exactly the same pitcher" because all the numbers on your spreadsheet add up the same way.

You are a champion at bad faith arguments.

It's a hypothetical. There were 64 games where Pedro got the win and only allowed one earned run. If the Expos, Red Sox, or Mets had been shut out in those games, he would have more losses and less wins. It's possible that the bullpen could have blown some of his leads, too. Pedro's (or any pitcher's) win total could easily shift based on things that happened while he was sitting on the bench.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/6/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):Any statistic in a vacuum tells you nothing.

Example 1: a guy has a WHIP of 1.00. Is he a good pitcher?

Example 2: a guy has an ERA of 2.50. Is he a good pitcher?

I agree with that.

But I stand by my point that W/L record adds nothing. Pedro Martinez was 219-100 over his career. He was a great pitcher. Is he less great if he went 185-105, while all his other stats stayexactly* the same? Is he suddenly better if his record shifts to 235-93 and all his other stats stay exactly the same?

Obviously something has changed between 219-100, 185-105 and 235-93. Since you're ruling out his performance (which is exaclty the same), then it's the offense and game situations behind him while he's pitching.

Different context, different results. Maybe the 185-105 record was due to him giving up key hits in close (or tie) games, whereas the 219-100 or 235-93 Pedro in a parellel universe was giving up those same hits to the same batters in the same inning with large leads.

That's just speculation. Without the context, it's impossible to know the answer. Just as it would be foolish to say "he's exactly the same pitcher" because all the numbers on your spreadsheet add up the same way.

You are a champion at bad faith arguments.

It's a hypothetical. There were 64 games where Pedro got the win and only allowed one earned run. If the Expos, Red Sox, or Mets had been shut out in those games, he would have more losses and less wins. It's possible that the bullpen could have blown some of his leads, too. Pedro's (or any pitcher's) win total could easily shift based on things that happened while he was sitting on the bench.

That's a ****** stat.

You're funny. You disregard my response as a "bad faith argument", and then proceed with a similarly stated argument of your own.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/6/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):"I'll try it this way, given all the tools we have to evaluate pitchers, W/L record is the least useful and should be ignored."

Do you realize that if you had reworded that statement as follows, this thread would have died 18 pages ago?

"I'll try it this way, given all the tools we have to evaluate pitchers, W/L record is the least useful and should be regarded with low weight."

It should be ignored.

Fine, ignore it. And then be confused why the best pitcher award is called the "Cy Young Award." And I know you don't this, because you ignore W/L record, but Young had the most wins in baseball history.

The ironic part about this is that I'm a pretty big "statnerd." I love all the advanced stats, secondary stats, etc. I recognize that W/L record isn't something to put a lot of stock in. Had I been an unbiased voter for the NL Cy Young, I'd probably vote in Kershaw. But I don't just ignore what I see in a baseball game. I can watch a game and tell you "This pitcher got unlucky...pitched his *** off and lost a 2-1 game" or "Nice win for this pitcher...dialed it up when he was in trouble, got out of jams and won a 6-4 game." I recognize there is a skill in getting a win. I promise you that most pitchers will be happy at the end of the day when they get a win, regardless of they allowed 4 runs or 1 run. They aren't happy if they lose 2-1. The goal is to win, not to have the best ERA possible.